Hacker News Reader

Comment by StudentStuff | Hacker News Reader

The source may not be anonymous to the WSJ (we the readers have no insight as to whether or not the source was anonymous), but articles like this where WSJ was unable to find a second source shouldn't be published as journalism. Uncorroborated hearsay does not make for a proper, publishable news article.

View on HN

It's disingenuous to associate yourself as a "reader" when you evidently didn't read the article carefully:

"Tesla declined to comment on the specific memo. But it confirmed it is seeking price reductions from suppliers for projects, some of which date back to 2016, and some of which haven’t been completed."

The second source the WSJ found was Tesla itself. Uninformed assertion does not make for a proper, useful Hacker News comment.

That's why they don't publish 'uncorroborated hearsay'. You are just calling it that. We the readers have a pretty decent idea what standards major newspapers adhere to. It's a minor exercise in reading to get familiar with them if you personally happen not to be.

It's not uncorroborated. Tesla confirmed the main claim, which was that they were seeking price reductions for past contracts.

Tesla confirmed something but from that statement it is impossible to determine they confirmed that they are looking cash back from past contracts. It can be read that Tesla confirmed they are looking for price reduction of current contracts some of which may have been established in 2016 but the terms of which have not completed. If suppliers have failed to fully deliver as required under the contracts such as meeting quality or timeline terms it would not be unusual for Tesla to go back to the suppliers to ask for a refund.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com